[Christ] suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into Hell. Because we believe that Jesus was a personal actor in space-time history, we deny that his death was merely symbolic. He suffered an unjust conviction and was crucified by the Roman authorities, who knew how to execute people effectively. We thus also deny the swoon theory that Jesus did not truly die on the cross, but only appeared to die and was taken down from the cross alive (as taught by Ahmadi Muslims and some older biblical critics). Jesus not only died but “descended into hell,” meaning that he continued to exist after his death to fulfill God’s purposes. This denies a humanistic account of Jesus as a mere mortal who simply died a martyr’s death and ceased to exist at his death.

Although it was not literally written by the original Apostles of Jesus Christ, The Apostles’ Creed has served as a foundational document and liturgical element in Christian churches since the fourth century. It represents the teachings of the Apostles even though they are not its authors. Its authors are unknown. The Apostles’ Creed’s purpose is not to replace the Bible, or to be the only creed for the church, or to reduce Christian truth to its statements. Rather, it summarizes biblical doctrine and is meant to be recited corporately by followers of Jesus. Its affirmations are necessarily part of Christian doctrine, and all three branches of Christianity affirm it (although not with the same interpretation of every aspect). There is spiritual power found in collectively confessing these truths with conviction on a regular basis and it is a good idea to memorize the Creed as well.
Few Americans believe the Apostles’ Creed today, and many outright oppose the God of the Bible and Christian doctrine. Opposition to Christianity is so strong that Aaron Renn, in his book Life in the Negative World, says that Christians must use new strategies to address the current setting, but without altering the biblical message itself. Renn advocates for a “counter-catechesis” to equip Christians to know what they ought not believe, given their Christian convictions in a hostile world. Thus, this essay, “A Counter Catechism.” There is, in fact, more to a formal catechism than the Apostles’ Creed, but many catechisms include it. We start here. After each statement of the Creed will follow what the Creed denies relative to the subject. The judgments are based on the law of noncontradiction: A is not non-A. Or, you cannot affirm anything about reality and its opposite as both being true in the same way and in the same respect.
The Apostles’ Creed and Some of What It Denies

I believe in God,the Father Almighty,Creator of Heaven and earth;

Since God is a personal and all-powerful being, who is the originator and designer of the universe, we deny that God is an impersonal force or principle, as taught in some Eastern religions and occultism. We also deny that God is a mother in the sense of an earth goddess. We deny that God is identified with the cosmos, as taught by pantheism. As Creator, God is transcendent in his self-existent being (Acts 17:15), and we deny that he is one with contingent creation. However, as omnipresent, God is immanent, and is closer to use than we are to ourselves (Augustine). But this doctrine does not compromise God’s transcendence. As Isaiah wrote.
For this is what the high and exalted One says—he who lives forever, whose name is holy:“I live in a high and holy place,but also with the one who is contrite and lowly in spirit,to revive the spirit of the lowlyand to revive the heart of the contrite. (Isaiah 57:15)
Since God is one God, we deny both polytheism (many finite gods) and dualism (one good god and one evil god). As God said to his people, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4). We further deny that there are many gods, but we worship one of them as supreme for us (henotheism). This is the teaching of Mormonism. As Isaiah proclaimed:
“You are my witnesses,” declares the Lord,“and my servant whom I have chosen,so that you may know and believe meand understand that I am he.Before me no god was formed,nor will there be one after me. (Isaiah 43:10)
2. and [we believe] in Jesus Christ, His only Son, Our Lord,
Since Jesus Christ is God’s only Son and our Lord, we deny that any other supposed god or savior has attained his exalted status (Matthew 11:27; John 14:6; Act 4:12; 1 Timothy 2:5). We further deny any teaching that denies Jesus as God’s only Son and our Lord, whether explicitly (such as Islam and Baha’i Faith) or implicitly (all non-Christian religions). Jesus was not an avatar (as are Hindu saviors), a manifestation of God (as in Baha’i Faith), a mere prophet (as taught in Islam), a mere sage (in the tradition of Buddha or Lao Tze or Confucius), nor was he a deluded mere mortal (atheism and much of Judaism).

Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,born of the Virgin Mary,

Because Jesus was supernaturally conceived by the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:18; Luke 1:26-35), we deny that Christianity can dispense with this doctrine and still be Christianity at all (theological liberalism).
Read More
Related Posts:

While Neil Postman’s critique of image-based and entertainment- focused culture dates to the middle of the 1980s, his warning about the dominance of the electronically-mediated image (which we watch) over the word (which we read) should still challenge us today, especially since the dangers he exposed are more potent today given the explosion of internet media.

My book on postmodernism, Truth Decay, assessed both the philosophy of postmodernism (nonrealism) and how cultural factors contributed to the postmodern view of truth as relative, negotiable, and constructed. Although we now hear less about postmodernism as a philosophy, it has taken root in the common mind and mood. I have found no better social critic to explain “truth decay” than social critic and media theorist, Neil Postman (1931–2003). By the term “truth decay,” I mean “a cultural condition in which the very idea of absolute, objective, and universal truth is considered implausible, held in open contempt, or not even seriously considered.”[1] I wrote that in 2000, but the situation has gotten far worse in the age of social media, influencers without knowledge or credibility, fake news, AI simulations (especially “deep fakes”), and more.
Nevertheless, one antidote to truth decay is an awareness of the potentially deceptive power of images and the need for spoken and written discourse to discern truth and find knowledge (justified true belief) through the evaluation of evidence and through reason. To that end, I will excerpt from and expand on sections from Truth Decay that address this issue of addressing reality aright, with frequent reference to Neil Postman’s, seminal book, Amusing Ourselves to Death, as well as his work Technopoly.
Information, Reading, and Watching
Postman describes the general problem of information overload, which is, paradoxically, tied to ignorance of reality.
The tie between information and human purpose has been severed, i.e., information appears indiscriminately, directed at no one in particular, in enormous volume and at high speeds, and disconnected from theory, meaning, or purpose.[2]
We often do not know how to assess information for reliability, how to separate the wheat from the chaff. Thus, most Americans are well-informed, hyperactive ignoramuses. They are information-rich, information-ravenous, and knowledge-deprived. To use biblical language, they are “tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming” (Eph. 4:14).
Moreover, most of this information is presented as entertainment or in entertainment-oriented form, usually dominated by alluring moving images. Hence the title of Postman’s book, Amusing Ourselves to Death. Amuse literally means not to think (or muse). While Postman’s work was written pre-internet and focused on the rise and dominance of television, his essential insight is that the production and distribution of images made possible by television—and now overwhelmingly more so by the internet—debases our public discourse about religion, politics, education, and everything else.
Sociologist Jacques Ellul (1912–94) observes that the “visionary reality of connected images cannot tolerate critical discourse, explanation, duplication, or reflection”—all rational activities required for separating truth from error. Cognitive pursuits “presuppose a certain distance and withdrawal from the action, whereas images require that I continually be involved in the action.” The images must keep the word in check, keep it humiliated, since “the word produces disenchantment with the image; the word strips it of its hypnotic and magical power.”[3] Words can expose an image age as false or misleading, as when we read in a magazine that a television program “re-created” an event that never occurred.
When the image overwhelms and subjugates the word, the ability to think, write, and communicate in a linear and logical fashion is undermined. Television’s images have their immediate effect on us, but that effect is seldom to cause us to pursue their truth or falsity. Television’s images are usually shorn of their overall context and meaning and are reduced to factoids (at best). Ideas located within a historical and logical setting are replaced by impressions, emotions, and stimulations. While images communicate narrative stories and quantitative information well (such as graphs and charts), words are required for more linear and logical communication.
Read More
Related Posts: